Changeset 8c50f0e for final-system/common/pkgmgt.xml

Timestamp:

Feb 21, 2006, 2:28:50 AM (18 years ago)

Author:

Jim Gifford <clfs@…>

Children:

7119f7d0

Parents:

e63113c

Message:

r1169@server (orig r1167): chris | 2006-02-11 19:55:38 -0800
Various text updates

File:

• final-system/common/pkgmgt.xml (modified) (4 diffs)

final-system/common/pkgmgt.xml

@@ -20 +20 @@
   issues that may arise when upgrading packages.</para>
 
-  <para>Some reasons why no package manager is mentioned in LFS or BLFS
-  include:</para>
+  <para>Some reasons why no specific package manager is recommended in LFS or
+  BLFS include:</para>
 
   <itemizedlist>
@@ -31 +31 @@
     <listitem>
       <para>There are multiple solutions for package management, each having
-      its strengths and drawbacks.  Including one that satisfies all audiences
+      its strengths and drawbacks. Including one that satisfies all audiences
       is difficult.</para>
     </listitem>
@@ -39 +39 @@
   the <ulink url="&hints-root;">Hints subproject</ulink> and see if one of them
   fits your need.</para>
-
-  <note>
-    <para>As no particular package management technique is mentioned in LFS,
-    the commands in the remainder of this book must be performed while logged in
-    as user <systemitem class="username">root</systemitem> and no longer as user
-    <systemitem class="username">lfs</systemitem>. Also, double check that
-    <envar>$LFS</envar> is set.</para>
-  </note>
 
   <sect2>
@@ -60 +52 @@
         <para>If one of the toolchain packages (Glibc, GCC or Binutils) needs
         to be upgraded to a newer minor version, it is safer to rebuild LFS.
-        Though you <emphasis>may</emphasis> be able to get by rebuilding all
+        Though, you <emphasis>may</emphasis> be able to get by rebuilding all
         the packages in their dependency order, we do not recommend it. For
         example, if glibc-2.2.x needs to be updated to glibc-2.3.x, it is safer